If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

I think the reason D'antoni decided not to play Nate and Harrington, is that they never move the ball. Both of them tend to chuck up shots and try to win the game themselves, rather than staying to what works which is moving the ball around and finding the open man. The problem with that is, why was Hughes out there? He's the biggest black whole of them all.

Gallo needs to be a focal point of this offense. He's by far our best shooter, and he has the highest b-ball IQ on this roster.

Don't Push Your Luck

Originally Posted by JayJ44

I think the reason D'antoni decided not to play Nate and Harrington, is that they never move the ball. Both of them tend to chuck up shots and try to win the game themselves, rather than staying to what works which is moving the ball around and finding the open man. The problem with that is, why was Hughes out there? He's the biggest black whole of them all.

Gallo needs to be a focal point of this offense. He's by far our best shooter, and he has the highest b-ball IQ on this roster.

The bottom line is that those two guys are our lead scorers. To play them 23 minutes (apiece) is ludicrous and inexcusable. Sure, they chuck up shots; but they can also hit them.

Gallinari has not proven himself to be capable of being a focal point, when his main weapon is the long range, wide open jumper. If he proves capable of hitting those type of shots, in the long run, while guarded and with consistency, he might end up being a good 3rd or 4th option on a mediocre team.

I don't think I was the only one that noticed how much we needed to have him sub out - so that Harrington and Nate could breathe some life into our team. Gallo simply cannot make things happen on his own: he's basically a guy that hangs around, waiting for open shots. He can't rebound, drive, defend, post up, or block shots; and his ball handling skills make me nervous.

Far far away from the orgy that consist of clyde, 8's, rady, smokes and rono

Posts

11,260

Rep Power

0

Originally Posted by OGKnickfan

The bottom line is that those two guys are our lead scorers. To play them 23 minutes (apiece) is ludicrous and inexcusable. Sure, they chuck up shots; but they can also hit them.

Gallinari has not proven himself to be capable of being a focal point, when his main weapon is the long range, wide open jumper. If he proves capable of hitting those type of shots, in the long run, while guarded and with consistency, he might end up being a good 3rd or 4th option on a mediocre team.
I don't think I was the only one that noticed how much we needed to have him sub out - so that Harrington and Nate could breathe some life into our team. Gallo simply cannot make things happen on his own: he's basically a guy that hangs around, waiting for open shots. He can't rebound, drive, defend, post up, or block shots; and his ball handling skills make me nervous.

He'll be better.

You've been hating on Gallo since draft night...now you look pretty silly giving him a little dap.

The offense just looks more fluid with Gallo on the floor...I'll take him down the stretch over Harrington 100 times out of 100. I mean he's only shooting 48% percent, what makes you think Harrington could do better?

Gallo can rebound, drive, defend, post up and block shots. Just not at a high rate because of his back, he's came back quickly from an injury, did your brain failed to remember that?

Gallo is 6"10...how many guys at 6"10 do you know handle like Gallinari? Crossing up guys and getting to the basket with fluidity and complete flow.

As he gets more experienced, his ball handling will improve.

You act like this guy reached his peak.

Gallo has work ethic and wants to be the best he can be and be a WINNER for New York.

Euro dudes have a lot of dedication to their club which is a plus for us aftr the express of low expectation losers we've had in the last 5 years. Gallo is a fresh of bresh air and you just need to calm and breathe...because all this indirect hating is really pointless since our hopes for the playoffs are DEAD and Danilo is the only thing worth watching and an occasional Chandler or Robinson dunk.

The bottom line is that those two guys are our lead scorers. To play them 23 minutes (apiece) is ludicrous and inexcusable. Sure, they chuck up shots; but they can also hit them.

Gallinari has not proven himself to be capable of being a focal point, when his main weapon is the long range, wide open jumper. If he proves capable of hitting those type of shots, in the long run, while guarded and with consistency, he might end up being a good 3rd or 4th option on a mediocre team.

I don't think I was the only one that noticed how much we needed to have him sub out - so that Harrington and Nate could breathe some life into our team. Gallo simply cannot make things happen on his own: he's basically a guy that hangs around, waiting for open shots. He can't rebound, drive, defend, post up, or block shots; and his ball handling skills make me nervous.

...

Really?

1/2 of Gallo's threes are off a screen and shot, or off a crossover or hesitation dribble with a guy on him.

it was a depressing final 5 minutes. clyde said it best when he asked why harrington and nate wasnt there. i was really impressed with gallo, and if what tuner said is true it only makes me more confident in him. he said hes only 60% healthy so i cant wait to see him in full strength. hughes didnt play terrible like u guys are sayin, he actually was decent in every quarter but the fourth. when harris stole the ball from hughes, i cudnt believe he jsut stood there. but im hopin robinson starts over duhon or somethin, cuz im tired of seein him struggle

Nice recognition, Tuneraddict...

Unlike most of the Bball morons here, you seem to actual see what is going on and why. He has flaws but Gallo is the best player on the team. For a guy that can't drive, he goes by guys every game that are smaller and quicker. Josh Smith, VC, Iggy. For a guiy that can't board, he gets the big ones when needed. Very good defender. He can pull up. He moves the ball. He gets caught covering for other guy's defensive mistakes. If he comes in 100% healthy next year, it will be his team. Chandler will be his wing man. Mark it down.

Unlike most of the Bball morons here, you seem to actual see what is going on and why. He has flaws but Gallo is the best player on the team. For a guy that can't drive, he goes by guys every game that are smaller and quicker. Josh Smith, VC, Iggy. For a guiy that can't board, he gets the big ones when needed. Very good defender. He can pull up. He moves the ball. He gets caught covering for other guy's defensive mistakes. If he comes in 100% healthy next year, it will be his team. Chandler will be his wing man. Mark it down.

The kid's a little full of himself, demanding a New York area team; but he has potential. As a later pick - I would have been happy to have him. It's still too early, however, to start calling him the next Dirk or "even better" - something I've heard on this forum. Dirk is one of the best to ever play this game. Gallo can't do all of the things that Dirk can do: shoot, post, rebound, block.

Harrington is the best player on this team: he can score in bunches (something gallo can't do), he can create his own shot, he can drive and even post up a little. After him - it's Nate. Gallo has to play some more and establish himself as being this or that. As of now - he's unestablished and untested. Frye looked like he was going to be a big time player - something Gallinari - has never appeared to be - and he completely fell apart. Just wait a little, before naming this guy the savior.

Harrington has played decent since coming here and it is true he can score alot of points.The problem that I have with him is that he thinks he can do it all and beat the whole team by himself and he can't hell nobody can.He gets in them zones were he won't play team ball at all and he shoots everytime he gets the ball.That bugs the hell out of me b/c they're four other TEAMATES out there thats on his side.

That brings me to Nate! Yes he can score in bunchs during a game but he also gets in that same zone that Harrington gets in and thinks he can beat the world by himself.I don't know if he got that from Harrington or he just plays like that too.I thought it was a good dicision by Dantoni to bench Harrington and Nate b/c they have gotten into a bad habit by not playing team ball.

Far far away from the orgy that consist of clyde, 8's, rady, smokes and rono

Posts

11,260

Rep Power

0

Originally Posted by OGKnickfan

The kid's a little full of himself, demanding a New York area team; but he has potential. As a later pick - I would have been happy to have him. It's still too early, however, to start calling him the next Dirk or "even better" - something I've heard on this forum. Dirk is one of the best to ever play this game. Gallo can't do all of the things that Dirk can do: shoot, post, rebound, block.

Harrington is the best player on this team: he can score in bunches (something gallo can't do), he can create his own shot, he can drive and even post up a little. After him - it's Nate. Gallo has to play some more and establish himself as being this or that. As of now - he's unestablished and untested. Frye looked like he was going to be a big time player - something Gallinari - has never appeared to be - and he completely fell apart. Just wait a little, before naming this guy the savior.

Harrington is the PF version of Jamal Crawford...he isn't the best, he just gets the opportunity to shoot a high volume of shots at a low FG percentage...I rather take an efficient scorer who moves the ball better.

Harrington is too much one on one and all these dramatic ass three point shots.

You're 6"9

Keep your ass in the paint and get an easier basket.

You think in soccer dudes would prefer to take long shots over a shot in closer range?

Make the game easier for you.

Harrington isn't good at this.

Explain to me how Frye was going to look like a "big time player" when all he could do at the time was live off Marbury's pick and rolls that gave Frye his NBA career.

Now without Marbury, Frye's game completely stunk.

Frye got outrebounded every night.
One of the worst defenders on the team.
Offensively, he was one dimensional and slow footed.

Harrington is the PF version of Jamal Crawford...he isn't the best, he just gets the opportunity to shoot a high volume of shots at a low FG percentage...I rather take an efficient scorer who moves the ball better.

Harrington is too much one on one and all these dramatic ass three point shots.

You're 6"9

Keep your ass in the paint and get an easier basket.

You think in soccer dudes would prefer to take long shots over a shot in closer range?

Make the game easier for you.

Harrington isn't good at this.

Explain to me how Frye was going to look like a "big time player" when all he could do at the time was live off Marbury's pick and rolls that gave Frye his NBA career.

Now without Marbury, Frye's game completely stunk.

Frye got outrebounded every night.
One of the worst defenders on the team.
Offensively, he was one dimensional and slow footed.

I thought that dude was lame even when he was averaging 14 ppg.

Al is better than Jamal...

Harrington is shooting like 44% on the season while Crawful is like...41%

Harrington is the PF version of Jamal Crawford...he isn't the best, he just gets the opportunity to shoot a high volume of shots at a low FG percentage...I rather take an efficient scorer who moves the ball better.

Harrington is too much one on one and all these dramatic ass three point shots.

You're 6"9

Keep your ass in the paint and get an easier basket.

You think in soccer dudes would prefer to take long shots over a shot in closer range?

Make the game easier for you.

Harrington isn't good at this.

Explain to me how Frye was going to look like a "big time player" when all he could do at the time was live off Marbury's pick and rolls that gave Frye his NBA career.

Now without Marbury, Frye's game completely stunk.

Frye got outrebounded every night.
One of the worst defenders on the team.
Offensively, he was one dimensional and slow footed.

I thought that dude was lame even when he was averaging 14 ppg.

At first, I thought Frye was just getting lucky; but as he continued - game after game - to hit these jumpers, I thought (as many others did) that he was a special player. Even if it had been his only weapon - it would have made him deadly: to be able to hit jumpers automatically - at 6'11. unfortunately - he stopped hitting them.

When he was first on the Knicks, he was averaging about 17 ppg, shooting jumpers at almost 60 percent. I should have known it was just a hot streak, but - like with Curry - the streak was so long that it fooled me.

My point - with Gallo - is that, even if he eventually ends up being a great player, he has to work on his game. Right now - he's one dimensional. Others have compared him to Dirk: one of the best (ever) - which is ludicrous.

Al - he's a good shooter, better than Craw. However - he lacks the late game heroics of a Crawford. Both guys are not going to be perfect - just like Marbury wasn't. The thing is that both need help. Players aren't going to be perfect... but that doesn't mean they're worthless. If Marbury had gotten help, just like if Craw or Harrington had gotten it, he would have been more successful in New York.

The main thing is getting a big man. I've coached and played enough ball to tell you that a guy that can get overwhelm the other team on the boards, help you on D (if you're beat), etc., makes life a million times easier for a player.

Either way - it's not a black and white issue: there are a lot of possibilities for these players - a lot of factors involved in their performance, present, past and future.

At first, I thought Frye was just getting lucky; but as he continued - game after game - to hit these jumpers, I thought (as many others did) that he was a special player. Even if it had been his only weapon - it would have made him deadly: to be able to hit jumpers automatically - at 6'11. unfortunately - he stopped hitting them.

When he was first on the Knicks, he was averaging about 17 ppg, shooting jumpers at almost 60 percent. I should have known it was just a hot streak, but - like with Curry - the streak was so long that it fooled me.

My point - with Gallo - is that, even if he eventually ends up being a great player, he has to work on his game. Right now - he's one dimensional. Others have compared him to Dirk: one of the best (ever) - which is ludicrous.

Al - he's a good shooter, better than Craw. However - he lacks the late game heroics of a Crawford. Both guys are not going to be perfect - just like Marbury wasn't. The thing is that both need help. Players aren't going to be perfect... but that doesn't mean they're worthless. If Marbury had gotten help, just like if Craw or Harrington had gotten it, he would have been more successful in New York.

The main thing is getting a big man. I've coached and played enough ball to tell you that a guy that can get overwhelm the other team on the boards, help you on D (if you're beat), etc., makes life a million times easier for a player.

Either way - it's not a black and white issue: there are a lot of possibilities for these players - a lot of factors involved in their performance, present, past and future.

How the **** can you bring up Frye's height and being able to hit jumpers and then **** on Gallo? He is a big that can shoot.